A cost-effectiveness analysis of a hydration response technology dressing in the treatment of venous leg ulcers in the UK

Introduction: Venous leg ulceration causes significant pain and suffering for patients, additionally it places considerable financial and service burden on the National Health Service (NHS). A large proportion of venous leg ulceration do not heal within the standard time frames of 16 – 24 weeks, resulting in static wounds which commonly have issues with increasing exudate production. Static wounds can have significant negative impact on the patients quality of life, the wound bed and periwound skin, increased risk of infection all of which results in delayed wound healing and increased health service costs. As the NHS continues to face times of austerity, services need to find solutions to be able to reduce cost and release nursing time whilst maintaining standards of care. Cutimed® Sorbion® Sachet S is a treatment option for the management of patients with a venous leg ulceration. The objective of this study was to provide an update of the health economic analysis of Cutimed® Sorbion® Sachet S in comparison to relevant comparators in the UK with current cost data.

Methods: Cutimed® Sorbion® Sachet S was compared against Zetuvit Plus, DryMax extra, KerraMax Care and Eclypse from a cost effectiveness perspective. Clinical data were derived from literature and expert opinion. Cost input was utilized based on publicly available data and literature. The average patient in the model is assumed to be 65 years with a diagnosed venous leg ulcer. It is assumed that patients in the different treatment arms have the same background mortality, hence the endpoint mortality is not included in the model. The analysis is based on a deterministic Markov model derived from Harding et al. with weekly cycles. The following assumptions are made: First, all patients start in a static health state with a non-healed but non-progressing venous leg ulcer. It is assumed in the model that patients can transition to a deteriorating health state where a wound is improving or the wound could progress. Additionally, venous leg ulcers could be healed from a progressed wound (i.e. improved wound), they could develop into a severe wound with complications (infections) to be treated in hospitals. The time frame for the analysis was fixed for one year and no re-occurence after healing was assumed to happen.

Results: The cost-effectiveness analysis demonstrates health economic dominance of Cutimed® Sorbion® Sachet S being more effective and cost-saving against all analysed comparators. When using literature-based input values the incrementally higher healing rates for Cutimed® Sorbion® Sachet S are 11.04 months (versus Zetuvit Plus), 29.04 months (versus DryMax extra), 1.68 months (versus KerraMax Care) and 11.04 months (versus Eclypse). Cost savings per patient were 37.60£ (versus Zetuvit Plus), 171.68£ (versus DryMax extra), 3.13£ (versus KerraMax Care) and 43.63£ (versus Eclypse). Clinical benefits and cost savings are increasing when real life practice assumptions based on expert opinion are included.

Conclusions: Based on the underlying health economic model, Cutimed® Sorbion® Sachet S is more effective and less costly than other comparative products in venous leg ulcers in the UK.